About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
MSNBC 17
MSNBCW 17
CSPAN 14
FOXNEWS 13
FBC 4
KQED (PBS) 4
KRCB (PBS) 4
CNNW 2
CSPAN2 2
WETA 2
WJZ (CBS) 2
CNN 1
KGO (ABC) 1
KPIX (CBS) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 102
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 102 (some duplicates have been removed)
." >>> good evenly iing. i'm chris matthews in washington. let me start with this. why is john mccain so gri? why america? why are we fighting the vietnam war all over again in the united states senate. the have it tree troll against chuck hagel. is it about lyndon johnson's inability to win that war or end it? what is it that burns so deeply in john mccain today? for some reason he wants to play it again and again in iraq and afterno afghanistan and again in iran. we look at the resentment burning in john mccain's heart. it's not against george w. bush and his political henchmen who tried to stay mccain's reputation in 2000 but a guy who fear and rallied against wounds just like he did. chuck hagel, a nightmare, by the way, whose flashbacks must haunt still the heart still of john sydney mccain. both are msnbc analysts. both of you, sir, and lady, are younger than me, but i must tell you i'm absolutely convinced we're watching a flashback. watch this. he did a long angry windup before he launched into his first so-called question which was really an indictment. it included putdowns as well
start with this, why is john mccain so angry? 40 years after the vietnam p.o.w.s came home the most famous of them is angrier than ever. we are we fighting vietnam again in the u.s. senate. the ticked-off hagel, is it just for show? the basic unfairness of vietnam itself that some went and some didn't? is it about lyndon johnson's inability to win the war or end it? what is it about john mccain that seems to excite those who know nothing about vietnam. well tonight we dig into the deep well of resentment burning in john mccain's patriotic heart. a resentment not against the north vietnamese who imprisoned and tortured him, not against george w. bush and his political henchmen who tried to stain mccain's reputation. but just like he did, in the same army of america's long nightmare in vietnam. i'm joined by david corn with "mother jones" and joy reed with the grio. i have to tell you i'm convinced we're watching a flashback. watch this, here's senator john mccain, he did a long, angry wind-up before he launched into his first so-called question. it was really an indictment for former
"hardball." ♪ >>> i'm chris matthews in washington. let me start with this. why is john mccain so angry? 40 years after the vietnam p.o.w.s came home, the most famous of them is angrier than ever. why is america, why are we fighting the vietnam war all over again in the united states senate? the ticked off vitriol against chuck hagel. what is it about is? is it for show? is it about something hagel said in the cloakroom? is it the unfairness of vietnam itself that some went and sond didn't. is it about johnson's inability to win that war or end it. what burns so deeply in john mccain these days? it seems to excite those who knew nothing about vietnam but want to replay it. we big into the deep well of resentment purning in john mccain's patriotic heart. a resentment not against the north vietnamese who imprisoned and tr toured him all those years, no the against george w. bush and his political henchmen who tried to stain mccain's reputation back in 2000, but against a guy who fought against fear and ralliesed against wounds just like he did in the same army of america's long nightmare in v
featuring senator john mccain talking to senator hagel about the comments he made about the surge in iraq. >> will you please answer the question? were you correct or incorrect when he said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since the vietnam? were you correct or incorrect? >> my reference -- >> are you answering the question? that is a pretty straightforward question. i would like an answer on whether you're right or wrong. you're free to elaborate than. >> i am not going to give you a yes or no answer. >> let the record show that you refuse to answer that question. please go ahead. >> if you like me to explain why a -- >> i act like an answer. >> i will not give you a yes or no. it is far more complicated to that. i will defer my judgment to history. as to the comment i made about the most dangerous foreign policy decision since vietnam, it was about not just the search but the overall tour of choice going into iraq. -- war of choice going into iraq. that particular decision made on the search, but more to the point, or war in iraq, i think
to know that his problems were going to come from john mccain, ted cruz, lindsey graham, and a couple of the other republican conservatives. it just seemed to go completely off track. not the confirmation, but the performance. >> well, here's what happened. he was bad. i mean, there's no other kind of way to put it. these things -- these public kwurmation hearings are at least part performance, andrea, and i would argue they're mostly performance, and you are right. he just seemed sort of ill equipped to manage it. only thing i could think of was this. strategically speaking. chuck hagel and his people decided going into this that, yes, he had a few issues, but they had already sort of been publicly litigated and had proven to be not disqualifying. that is, he had got tony this point. therefore, he should just take sort of a passive stance, let ted cruz, let john mccain, let them lecture him sort of be apologetic and say i did the best i that i could, but not go on the attack, not be aggressive, be under the theory that if nothing else came out that ultimately the republican senators
that our troops are getting the kind of strategy and mission that they deserve. >> joe, senator john mccain offered a different -- and this is -- actually, i felt better after i heard this -- he offered a different rationale for the republican opposition. it's personal. it's one that dates back to the bush presidency. >> oh, okay. >> there's a lot of ill will towards senator hagel because when he was a republican, he attacked president bush mercilessly. at one point said he was the worst president since herbert hoover, said that the surge was the worst blunder since the vietnam war, which is nonsense. and was very anti his own party and people. people don't forget that. you can disagree, but if you're disagreeable, then people don't forget that. >> oh, okay. >> you know, richard haass, for the 66,000 troops currently serving in afghanistan and for the families all across america this morning, i'm sure they're glad to know that we don't have a secretary of defense in place and we're not going to because of a seven-year-old political grudge. forget about sequestration. forget about all the cu
republicans say show he is not the right hand it. hagel refused to give senator john mccain and direct statement -- answered. >> please answer the question. were you correct or incorrect when he said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam? where you correct or incorrect? yes or no? >> my reference to -- >> answer the question wellesz senator hagel. the question is storywriter wrong? that is a pretty straightforward question. >> the nominee said that referred to his feelings about the war in general and not just the surgeon took heat about his work with 00. hagel was as defeat is anti-american nukes. >> the position of 00, my position that certain individuals, nestle security leaders have talked about including himself, it has never been unilateral disarmament, ever. never. >> hagel backtracked on his comment about the political power of the jewish lobby. >> i should have used another term, and i'm sorry. i regretted. the use of intimidation, i should have used influence. i think that would have been a more appropriate term. >> co
hitters. house democratic leader nancy pelosi. and senator john mccain. pelosi and mccain only on "fox news sunday." then, senators grill the president's nominee for cia director over the targeted killing of terrorist suspects. we will ask our sunday panel about new demands to lift the veil on drone strikes. and our power player of the week can tell you almost everything the president does and how you often he does it. all right now on "fox news sunday." >> chris: and hello again from fox news in washington. when president obama delivers his state of the union is speech tuesday, one big issue will be sequestration. $85 billion in automatic spending cuts due to kick in march 1. the white house now warns this will mean damaging layoffs of teachersers law enforcement and food safety inspectors and the pentagon will be hit, too. they propose a mix of spending cuts and, yes, more taxes through limiting deductions for the wealthy. i sat down late friday with house democratic leader nancy pelosi and asked her are about the fast approaching deadline. congress woman pa lo pelosi, we back to "fo
. chris wallace has exclusive interviews with house minority leader nancy pelosi and senator john mccain. you don't want to miss that. i'm unroberts in for -- i'm john roberts in for shannon bream today. have a great rest of our weekend and if you are in new england get to shoveling now before the rain comes in later captioned by closed captioning services, inc. >> chris: i'm chris wallace. what is the state of our union? foreign and domestic? as president obama prepares to address the nation tuesday, he faces a buzzsaw of issues. automatic spending cuts. gun control. immigration reform. and the resurgent al-qaeda. we will talk about all this with two of washington's heavy hitters. house democratic leader nancy pelosi. and senator john mccain. pelosi and mccain only on "fox news sunday." then, senators grill the president's nominee for cia director over the targeted killing of terrorist suspects. we will ask our sunday panel about new demands to lift the veil on drone strikes. and our power player of the week can tell you almost everything the president does and how you often he does it.
, valued friend of so many years, john mccain. and the leadership of this committee throughout my 30 years of the senate has been drawn from the ranks of the strongest and the best of this membership. we have it today, and i have every reason to believe we will have it tomorrow. i have a very fortunate record of public service for many years. no chapter was more important than my service on this committee. you will carry with you the rest of your life the recollections of the work you have done for one of america's most valued assets, the men and women and their families of the armed services of the united states. i had written out a nice, long statement, and then last night, i got sam nunn's statement and chuck hagel's statement, and i felt that another statement would not do. i would rather say a few words from the heart. i was in the navy. i did no more than any other kid on my block. we all went. good friends, we thank chuck hagel and mrs. hagel and his family. because if confirmed, is an enormous commitment by the family to this position. you have made the decision to offer yourself o
as some aspects i concurred with. senator john mccain is asking him to prove that the. >> explain what take -- techniques and why they could work and why some techniques which are in violation of the geneva convention are okay but others are not? there is a lot of questions for mr. brennan. >> after leaving the cia in 2007 he defended the enhanced method saying they quote max save the lives quote. >> i expressed my personal objections and my views about certain such as water boarding and nudity professing my personal objections but i did not try to stop it because it was something being done in a different part of the agency under authority of the others. >> also high-profile leaks that were strategically done to make obama look top. >> he says he is not the subject of a probe, but a witness. lou: thank you to our chief congressional correspondent mike emmanuel. now the stunning disjointed efforts of communicating within the administration and a very serious lack of understanding how to react to the attacks on benghazi our next guest says the legally correct drone program carried out b
generator. she did not turn the lights out. in other news, john mccain says he's still not sure how he's going to vote on chuck hagel but he opposes a filibuster for chuck hagel and karl rove is forming yet another super pac to take on fellow republicans. would you buy a used car from this man? i don't think so. why anybody would trust him with a dime after he blew $400 million the last time around. we'll also take a look at president obama yesterday in minneapolis saying people have to decide do they stand with cops or kids. all of that coming up right here on current tv. >> nine. >> this is what 27 tons of marijuana looks like. (vo) with award winning documentaries that take you inside the headlines, way inside. (vo) from the underworld, to the world of privilege. >> everyone in michael jackson's life was out to use him. (vo) no one brings you more documentaries that are real, gripping, current. stop looking at car interiors. get inspired by other stuff. yep. yep. ok. sure. why not? woah. touchscreens. put that in your dash. now, luxury stuff. make your seats like that.
with john mccain who apparently is convinced at this point in his life the most seminal event in u.s. history was not the constitutional convention, concord, lexington or-- it was the surge. and where you stood on the surge. >> woodruff: in iraq. >> in iraq that determines whether, in fact, you are a visionary or a retrograde. but i was-- it was a lousy performance by chuck hagel. he obviously decided he wasn't going get confrontational. when ted cruz, the junior senator from texas basically accused him of dishonesty, raised questions about his honor, and-- the idea that chuck hagel, that david and i know didn't say wait a minute, you know, and he did at the last question, i'm out of time now but let me ask you about this about your speeches and what you reported and didn't report. i mean at that point chuck hagel says let me tell you, you know, you've just raised a question, i don't care about time or time being out this is my time to tell you, you know, that you are absolutely wrong and-- and that was just missing completely. >> woodruff: so there is some reporting that hagel thi
beginning with john mccain who apparently is convinced at this point in his life the most seminal event in u.s. history was not the constitutional convention concord lexington or-- it was the surge. and where you stood on the surge. >> woodruff: in iraq. >> in iraq that determines whether in fact you are a visionary or a retrograde. but i was-- it was a lousy performance by chuck hagel. he obviously decided he wasn't going get confrontational. when ted cruz, the junior senator from texas basically accused him of dishonesty raised questions about his honor, and-- the idea that chuck hagel that david and i know didn't say wait a minute you know and he did at the last question i'm out of time now but let me ask you about this about your speeches and what you reported and didn't report. i mean at that point chuck hagel says let me tell you you know, you've just raised a question, i don't care about time or time being out this is my time to tell you, you know, that you are absolutely wrong and-- and that was just missing completely. >> woodruff: so there is some reporting that hagel this is a del
did not stop there. john mccain held him accountable for not supporting the surge in iraq. >> in an interview 2011, in an interview with the financial times you said i disagreed with the president obama his decision to surge in iraq as i did with president bush on the surge in iraq. do you stand by those comments, senator hagel? >> senator, i stand by them because i made them. >> were you correct in your assessment? >> what i would refer to the judgment of history. >> deserves your judgment whether you were right or wrong about the surge? >> i'll explain why i made those comments. >> i want to whether or not they were right or wrong? >> the surge assisted in the objective. if we review the record. >> please answer the question. were you correct or incorrect when you said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam, were you correct or incorrect? >> my reference to -- >> the question is were you right or wrong. that is a pretty straightforward question. i would like you to answer whether you were right or wrong and free to
interrogation program. but there was some aspects of it that i concurred with. senator john mccain is asking brennan to prove it. >> i think you'd have to explain what techniques, where they were able to work and why some technique which is are also in violation of the gee into he have a conventions are okay, but there are others are not. and so i think there is a lot of questions out there for mr. brennan. >> after leaving the c.i.a. in november 2007, brennan defended the enhanced methods saying they have, quote, saved lives. today brennan offered this explanation. >> i had expressed my personal objections and views to my agency colleagues about certain of those eit's such as water boarding, nudity and others where i professed my personal objection to it. but i did not try to stop it because it was something that was being done in a different part of the agency under the authority of others. >> another key question has been high profile leaks which critics say were strategically done to make mr. obama look tough. brennan says he's not the subject of a probe or target. he's a witness. chris.
clinton, john mccain, joe biden, and newt gingrich were falling all over themselves to express their support for israel. the only exception to that rule was senator chuck hagel. i don't have anything to go with that with what you might have said but -- some of the concerns -- i used to say when i was the whip in the house you can count on the house and the senate to be among other thing, always pro-israel. i think that is the main stream of our views. i've seen a number of times that you've said you can be pro-israel but that does not mean you have to be for everything that israel is for. they are what they are. they are reported from comments that you made that are out of the context of the other comments. also, earlier today, i asked you about the bloated pentagon. you said that -- those comments were before the sequestration bill passed. they were after the bill passed. sequestration passed on august 2 and the interview was on august 29. what you said on august 29 of -- in that "financial times" interview you said "the defense department, i think -- this is your quote "the d
there is a possibility of direct talks with iran. republican senator john mccain telling reuters he would have no objection to direct talks, but questioned how much these with cheese -- would achieve its fundamental questions about the iranian nuclear program are unresolved. [video clip] >> our policy is not containment. it is to prevent iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. we have also made clear that the iranian leaders need not sentence their people to economic isolation. there is still time and space for diplomacy, backed by pressure, to succeed. the ball is in the government of iran's courts. host: if we were able to begin negotiations with iran and its intentions for to ease between the u.s. in iran, which became a huge problem to present jimmy carter in 1979 with the hostage situation, if we make progress, how would that use the entire neighborhood and countries around iran and afghanistan? guest: it depends on how the israelis interpret this. the israelis believe they have more to fear about iran's nuclear capabilities and the rest of the name of the. i have read -- than the rest of t
senator john mccain was questioning secretary panetta and general dempsey and it was a moment when he asked about, it could be lost, in terms of the overall coverage, but it's where he asked whether the two of them supported arming rebels in syria, and many of our viewers may wonder, what does this have to do with benghazi and libya? listen to senator john mccain and then i'll explain. >> did you support the recommendation by secretary of state, then secretary of state clinton, and then head of cia general petraeus that we provide weapons to the resistance in syria. >> we did. >> you did support that? >> we did. >> reporter: that's the first time that i've heard that the defense department and military officials say that they had recommended arming syrian rebels. you'll remember over the weekend that "the new york times" reported that last summer petraeus and clinton approached the white house for permission to arm the rebels. "the new york times" says that the white house rejected that request. however, there have been some implications from questions from senators on the hill as to
mccain. we've talked about john mccain and chuck hagel. once very close friends. mccain during the chuck hagel confirmation hearing was one of the most poignant, maybe ted cruise was the most poignant, but one of the most pointed critics of haling. mccain not putting his name to that letter. it's -- this seems like a foregone conclusion here in that this is much more for the public record and for history's sake why this letter was sent. >> and one more thing. before we leave, hagel, is this whole stir yesterday where. >> did you take money from the friends of hamas? >> it's lake-effect like this was a star claim we are bsh it got some legs, and it was all about theater. when you had all those senators, you know, people like cruise questioning him, talking about the friends of hamas, i mean, they were out for blood when it came to hagel and how to make a design in some ways. >> without even checking factual basis for their questions. >> no. >> you can ask anything and create a soundbyte, and people pick it up in social media, and it's off and running. >> there was some degree of
you have senator john mccain scolding you, when senator john mccain has been one person who has been after chuck hagel on his own, then you know you have gone too far. rubio was flawless last week. he took a mistake, which looked like the mistake of a water bottle, and turned it into a plus, like few politicians have ever done. maybe like bill clinton we went on, i think, one of the late night talk shows to make fun of johnny carson. john where i carson. s thank you. >> well, rubio so far has just about done everything right, and if one of the big players in the emgregs debate, working with the other side, and has shown that aside from that state of the union response, he picks himself up and moves right on and is making his foreign trip. thank you very much. margaret, good to see you. chris, of course, our daily fix. connecticut lawmakers, meanwhile, are moving very swiftly on new laws at the state level to combat gun violence inspect response to the newtown massacre. vice president biden was there yesterday to urge them on. >> the reflection of what the standing assumption is in am
didn't exactly treat him with kid gloves. listen to this exchange with senator john mccain. >> will you answer the question, please. were you correct or incorrect when you said that the surge blunder in thist dangerous country since vietnam. correct or incorrect? yes-or-no answer. >> my reference to --. >> are can you answer the question? the question is, were you right or wrong? that is a straightforward question. i would like to have an answer. >> i am not going do give you a yes-or-no answer. >> he refused to answer the question for the record. >>gregg: john mccain may have missed his calling, he should have been a lawyer. so, how many republicans will vote for their former colleague. we have john leboutillier, former republican congressman, for new york. pat caddell, former pollster for president carter and doug schoen former pollster for bill clinton i googled worst confirmation hearing ever and up popped chuck hagel. i thought it would be john tower or bork. hagel got the worse. >> here is what happened. bottom line, chug hagel demonstrated why i believe he is not qualified to be
sub marines just to our 50. even john mccain who was quite critical in the hearing said this nomination should go through. >> right. >> well, yeah. on that point, it looks like the nomination will be confirmed. the problem is it loonlgs like there's a filibuster or attempt at a filibuster and that means democrats and the white house have to come up with 60 votes to get this through. mccain has indicated to break a filibuster. looks like they would have the votes to do that. do you think we have sort of crossed a line here, bad precedent set for future cabinet nominations? never before has there been a filibuster of a defense secretary nominee. only two rejected since 1959. nobody tried to filibuster one in that time. are we creating bad precedent? >> why the senate has the right as a senator said who is supporting senator hagel to do a filibuster. i think it would set a bad precedent because as many people often very conservative have said in this particular case, the president has the right to have who he wants as cabinet secretary as long as there's nothing egregious i
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 102 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)